Even better: put it on your Congress critter's car :).

The problem with this program (I work in the public school system - as a 'technology coordinator' - think system/network administrator, technician, paper jam fixer, power switch operator - you get the idea) is PEOPLE.

Originally, the program was supposed to be a means for the FCC to funnel funds from the Universal Service Fund (hey gang, it's been part of your telephone bill since 1934 --- where do you think rural area access to telephones came from?) to develop telecommunications infrastructure for schools. In many American schools, a basic 1890s technology is not in the classroom. It's called a telephone. Also, the intention of this project was to also assist in the installation of data circuits for classrooms, and also telecomm access at a reduced rebate rate (it's a rebate program, not a giveaway).

However, the way the FCC implemented the program makes it as unwieldy as a bulldozer in a rowboat. I've been dealing with the program and our member 16 school districts (largest is 2,011, smallest 98) in our extremely rural area (this was supposed to help poor and underserved areas, remember?). Well, most of our schools gave up in disgust with the bureaucratic hassle -- there are a number of FCC forms to fill out (FCC Form 470, FCC Form 471, FCC Form 486, FCC Form 500 --- all of 'em multipage, and with incomprehensible instructions written by guess who -- The FCC!).

It helps schools, but the program needs redesign. I could go on for hours about the flaws in the program. I find these reports of fraud and waste to be incredible; I've had schools turned down for the least little wrong dot and t on the forms. I also get corrupt companies every year trying to "help" us write our E-rate applications (which, BTW, is verboten) so they can get a piece of the pie. Well, 2.25 billion dollars isn't a whole lot of money per student when divvied up among all students who are eligible.

The discount (rebate) that each school building gets is based on the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) also known as the Free/Reduced Lunch program. Funding is poverty indexed, therefore, the schools with the least amount of technical support are the ones who will get the most money. This returns the problem of people: the really poor districts who can't afford luxuries like reading and math experts to help their underachieving students learn (it helps if they get to eat at home and have a dry, warm place to sleep also) are suddenly, on the filling out of a few pesky forms, presented with a funding source for "technology". Note that this program provides funding for telecomm access, internal network wiring for qualifying districts, and maybe a server -- no workstations (and definitely no Corvettes as I've seen in one of these little articles). You have to purchase these services and goods from a certified (Form 472) vendor, who all have to "bid" on the project (this was before the time of CheneyBurton). You select a bid, and fill out form 471 to accept that bid, and pony up your district's (usually in the 20-40% range) money for the project.

Remember, this is for telecomm services. If the school depends solely on the vendor for advice, the vendor gets pretty much carte blanc on whatever they want to do. I see that the SLC audits are starting up (the source of these stories). Now, I haven't had one yet (we only do videoconferencing T-1s and basic telephones, about 6,000$US a year per site - combined), but the audits of the schools are pretty fierce. Also, there's no appeal process: if the audit chooses, they can demand any amount of payment back (now, this is from the school, not the vendor -- ).

Corrupt people abound in this world (or haven't you noticed?). Programs like these provide unscrupulous individuals and companies the opportunity to slash at the federal boodle for short term gain. However, I understand that all E-rate projects will be audited; the audits tend to go unnoticed because the vast majority are fine. The real problem, people, is the current climate in this country, where quick profit, damn the cost to the community, is dominant.

The program actually creates more good than it shows. It's just a royal pain in the a** every year (the year 7 process starts July 1st, for the 2005-2006 school year). The form 470s are filed; then the Form 471 forms start up with a 75 day "window" of opportunity where all applications are treated to the same "delivery" date for priority funding. I haven't received confirmation for this year yet, and I'm working on two years down the road. The time it takes to work this program is unbelievable.

Oh, and you automatic anti-taxers out there, be consistent. Don't use any publicly paid for roads, telephone services, use our police or fire departments, or military for defense. Guess what? Your property is registered with the county: so you are using *MY* tax assessor to define what property *YOU* own. Taxes are the price we pay for our society. This doesn't mean that we should simply accept taxation -- it is our duty as citizens to carefully consider taxes and whether or not we should support 'em. I've voted both for and against taxes, depending on the 'internals' of the proposition. This one, despite all it's warts, is worth it. Damn, never thought I'd be defending the SLC E-rate program . . . . considering I've damned it repeatedly for the past six years. . .